Effects of slow pace

[shots]

Originally Posted by cj

My belief, and smarter guys than me that follow NYRA have come around to this, is that the purses for 2/3/4 finishers are too good now and many would rather "play it safe" than try to win and risk and off the board finish.

And if you know the trainers in a circuit who are prone to do this it helps when preparing verticle tickets. And the jock gets the easy lead or sets the soft pace because the other jocks give to him. Why they do, another answer that would be helpful to know.

[RXB]

My understanding is that the jockey gets 10% of a winning purse share and 5% of a second or third share. Using the NYRA purse sharing structure (60-20-11) and a purse of $80,000, jockeys' shares would be as follows:

First = 6% of total purse = $4,800
Second = 1.1% of total purse = $880
Third = 0.55% of total purse = $440

Riding for second or third seems like a very bad financial decision for a jockey.

[Tom]

Whatever the reason, my thoughts are some of the worst jockeys in history are at NYRA and I want no part of any of their racing. I'm surprised no one has leaped over the fence and grabbed one of those yankers by the throat.

[cj]

Originally Posted by shots

And if you know the trainers in a circuit who are prone to do this it helps when preparing verticle tickets. And the jock gets the easy lead or sets the soft pace because the other jocks give to him. Why they do, another answer that would be helpful to know.

I agree 100%...there are a few trainers that absolutely give these types of instructions.

[cj]

Originally Posted by RXB

My understanding is that the jockey gets 10% of a winning purse share and 5% of a second or third share. Using the NYRA purse sharing structure (60-20-11) and a purse of $80,000, jockeys' shares would be as follows:

First = 6% of total purse = $4,800
Second = 1.1% of total purse = $880
Third = 0.55% of total purse = $440

Riding for second or third seems like a very bad financial decision for a jockey.

I didn't mean to imply this is strictly a jock decision...I think it is often the strategy they are told to employ.

[RXB]

If I was a jockey and somebody was telling me to ride to protect a top three finish more than trying to win, knowing what it would do to my bottom line over the long haul I'd be saying thanks-but-no-thanks without a moment's hesitation. And the jockey's agent would have the same reaction, I'm sure. Especially if we're talking about the type of locked-and-loaded horse upon which the initial post in this thread was based. There would also be an integrity issue.

[cj]

Originally Posted by RXB

If I was a jockey and somebody was telling me to ride to protect a top three finish more than trying to win, knowing what it would do to my bottom line over the long haul I'd be saying thanks-but-no-thanks without a moment's hesitation. And the jockey's agent would have the same reaction, I'm sure. Especially if we're talking about the type of locked-and-loaded horse upon which the initial post in this thread was based. There would also be an integrity issue.

I don't think they are told, specifically, to ride for a placing instead of a win, but a specific way to ride the horse that has the same effect---conservatively.

I completely agree it isn't in the rider's best short term interest, but it certainly is in his best long term interest, particularly if riding for someone like Todd Pletcher or Chad Brown or Kiaran McLaughlin.

[RXB]

Guys who win at the rate of McLaughlin or Brown or Pletcher, I don't think they are very often giving instructions that compromise their horses' chances of winning. I'll agree to disagree on this one and leave it at that.

[cj]

Originally Posted by RXB

Guys who win at the rate of McLaughlin or Brown or Pletcher, I don't think they are very often giving instructions that compromise their horses' chances of winning. I'll agree to disagree on this one and leave it at that.

Fair enough, but I've personally heard some pretty puzzling instructions given from some top level trainers.

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by Tom

Whatever the reason, my thoughts are some of the worst jockeys in history are at NYRA and I want no part of any of their racing. I'm surprised no one has leaped over the fence and grabbed one of those yankers by the throat.

I've fantasized about it tremendously in the last 2 years and 11 months.

Unfortunately, my sanity, my responsibilities and my good natured soul stops me.

[EMD4ME]

Originally Posted by cj

My belief, and smarter guys than me that follow NYRA have come around to this, is that the purses for 2/3/4 finishers are too good now and many would rather "play it safe" than try to win and risk and off the board finish.

I can see that CJ. All I'll say in response is only 1 guy in the race (jock) will make $3,000 or so. The rest will make peanuts.

The pools at NYRA still have $500,000 plus a race in the middle of winter on a WED.

You complete the rest.

[EMD4ME]

And it's only become an issue (over slow paces-weird races) when Ramon was knocked out by No Way and Iherd in Jan of 2013 and has continued to be an issue since with those 2 boys running the room. It is extremely evident from Dec 1st thru May 1st when the veteran boys play at GP at KEE.

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

Is form not determined by looking at the "past data?" (i.e. past performances)

This is true but, how can one be certain of "current form" which I thought he was concerned with in determining a horse's condition.

[JJMartin]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

Is form not determined by looking at the "past data?" (i.e. past performances)

Don't forget about physical appearance which counts for more than you think.

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

Is form not determined by looking at the "past data?" (i.e. past performances)

Totally agree with you Dave and that "past data" should be sensitize to the environmental factors at the time of the horse's performance and not some nebulous anecdotal track variant.